Huang Yaokun Linguistic Paper Collection

Author: Huang Yaokun
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-08-28
Features: "A soldier who doesn’t aspire to be a marshal is no good soldier" is a well-known saying in the military. I’d like to say in imitation: "A scholar without aspirations is no true scholar, at least not a good one." Aspiration, in ancient times, meant "seeking a model"; "seeking a model from the highest," meant the goal of aspiration was lofty. As a scholar, the result of aspiration is that his writings have distinctive features; "seeking a model from the highest," his writings must possess remarkable features, or even outstanding and important features—this should be a principle. Professor Huang Yaokun’s collection of essays may not have many words, yet it possesses、. What kind of features? How many features? First, "substance," the "substantial" "Yin." Every essay in Professor Huang’s collection, from the main text to the footnotes, is substantial. What do I mean? His articles contain no false statements or empty rhetoric. No false statements mean every sentence has a source and basis, with no exaggerated or baseless imagination or speculative criticisms, but rather grounded arguments and cautious, rigorous reasoning. No empty rhetoric means "no water," as often said in mainland academic circles. Look at his discussion of Shen Geng’s "Four Tones, Five Sounds, Nine Twists, and the Circles of Twists" on the "Five Sounds," which refers not to tones or twists, but to "the analytical method of five rhyme categories," meticulously elaborated, as if peeling an onion, leading to conclusions. Similarly, in his essays on "The Five Sounds Family" and "Na Yin (Na Jia)," the evidence he draws upon is extremely rich, ranging from classic texts and collections to unearthed Qin and Han bamboo slips, with some texts and writings previously unknown, leaving one in awe. I’ve been studying phonology for some time, but I was unaware of "Na Yin" and "Na Jia" until the 1980s, when I read Professor Huang’s major treatise in the Journal of the Society for the Study of the Kan Society from Kyoto University, where I first learned of these terms. By the early 1990s, while researching Lu Zongmai’s Qieyun Method, I reviewed a large number of Song Dynasty literary collections and found that many scholars of the time discussed "Na Yin," showing that terms like "Five Sounds Residing," "Five Sounds Family," "Na Yin," and "Na Jia" were very common cultural phenomena in ancient times. Regrettably, today, those who understand these are as rare as phoenix feathers and rhinoceros horns. The British Library’s Dunhuang manuscript Returning Thirty Letters Example is an important classic Chinese phonology text, known as Qieyun studies. Professor Huang reviews the strengths and weaknesses of previous research, then judges based on pre-Tang rhyme catalogs and other materials, re-determining their order. For example, the long essay "A Study of the Examination Rules and Comparative Research of Song Feng" published in the New Yanjing Journal is a meticulous comparison by Professor Huang, pointing out that the examination rules before the Qieyun diagrams in these two Song Dynasty texts are not identical. The examination rules of the Song Dynasty Qieyun Zhizhangtu could not have been copied or adapted from the Four Tones Equal as seen today, with solid evidence that is hard to refute. In summary, every essay in this book is substantial—a fact beyond dispute. In Chinese, "substance" is often linked to "simplicity," forming the term "pingshi," showing that "substance" was originally ordinary, natural, and expected. Yet in today’s academia, "substance" is extraordinary, deserving praise, and needs to be promoted. Look at how many articles in today’s newspapers and online are attacking and condemning the improper academic conduct or even the corruption in academia! Regrettably, the results are minimal. This makes it even more apparent that what should be ordinary has become extraordinary. In these times, "substantiality" is so rare and precious that every time I read Professor Huang Yaokun’s articles, I feel exhilarated, filled with admiration: "In this world, there are still such truly substantial writings!" It reminds me of Sun Xinggong’s words in Shishuo Xinyu·Literature: "You should throw it on the ground—it must make the sound of metal and stone!" I interpret this as: only substantiality can make such a sound. How can writings full of "water" achieve this? The group in "Wei 1958" is the four rhymes "Dong Dong Song Wu," with the initial sounds being "Duan Duan Xin Ying." If all are adjusted to the tongue sounds like "Dong Dong," it becomes "Dong Dong Dong Gu." Wei Jiangong believed that the inconsistency between the going tone, entering tone, level tone, and rising tone in this group was due to the dual pronunciation or compound nature of the words "Dong Gu," so the compilers of Qieyun did not adopt "Dong Gu" as a rhyme name. He proposed the following explanation: